Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
ii. Clearing of the MTC buffer be allowed as requested by the 93 <br />applicant and recommended for approval by Planning 94 <br />Department staff. 95 <br />iii. Re-vegetation of visual breaks shall be required as proposed by 96 <br />the applicant and recommended for approval by Planning 97 <br />Department staff. 98 <br />4. CONDITION 13 (k) SIGNAGE – Renderings, and proposed location, of signage 99 <br />was submitted by the applicant for review at the Planning Board’s January 10, 100 <br />2018 meeting. 101 <br />Board members reviewed the renderings, and the location of the proposed signage, 102 <br />and verified permits would be required to erect the sign(s) even if the master plan 103 <br />was approved. Staff reminded the Board all the approval of the rezoning petition 104 <br />allows is for the property to be rezoned to a new designation. All applicable 105 <br />provisions of the UDO, and all imposed conditions, will have to be observed for the 106 <br />project. This includes site plan review and approval prior to earth disturbing activities. 107 <br />The Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed landmark 108 <br />and entry portal signage as depicted in the submitted rendering(s). 109 <br />5. CONDITION 13 (k) (iii) (2) (e) ILLUMINATION OF SIGNAGE - A BOCC member 110 <br />requested clarification on the method that will be used to illuminate signage. A 111 <br />recommended condition indicated all signs shall be internally illuminated while 112 <br />language indicates external lighting would be allowed for entry portal signs. 113 <br />Staff reminded the Board this was our error in completing the recommended 114 <br />conditions. All signage is required to be internally illuminated. Planning Board 115 <br />members indicated they did not have any further concerns on this item. 116 <br />6. LAND USE – SCHOOLS, Elementary, Middle, and Secondary: There was 117 <br />general discussion on allowing for the development of a school (i.e. elementary, 118 <br />middle, high school, etc.) within the project. 119 <br />The applicant, after conferring with the Director, has requested the SCHOOLS, 120 <br />Elementary, Middle, and Secondary land use be removed as an allowable land 121 <br />use within the project. The conditions of approval have been updated 122 <br />accordingly. 123 <br />There was no further discussion and the Planning Board indicated their 124 <br />agreement with respect to the elimination of the land use by consensus. 125 <br />7. UTILITY CONDITION(S): There was general discussion on the imposition of 126 <br />conditions associated with the extension of utilities to serve the project in 127 <br />general. 128 <br />The Board voted unanimously to recommend approval of the proposed utility 129 <br />conditions as recommended by staff and agreed to by the applicant. 130 <br />8. Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA): Staff informed the Board on December 4, 131 <br />2017 the applicant submitted a revised TIA providing additional detail on anticipated 132 <br />traffic impacts/required improvements associated with the project. This was in 133 <br />response to staff requests for additional detail. A summary of recommended 134 <br />improvements as contained within the revised TIA are as follows: 135 <br />Recommended improvements for the 2020 Build Phase are: 136 <br />85